My thoughts on my newly purchased 70-300 4/5.6 USM IS L Lens

Started May 12, 2012 | Discussions thread
DBCossini
DBCossini Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: My thoughts on my newly purchased 70-300 4/5.6 USM IS L Lens

Brian Wadie wrote:

I don't think that IQ is much better than the 70-300mm NON L. I guess you pay for the build quality, that's all. Many people have been disappointed about this lens IQ not being L quality. And, is super heavy.

-- hide signature --

show signature --

Care to share any of the threads relating to this? (its not the reaction of those of us who actually own and use the lens)

Popular Photography for one! Quote: "This lens gives high-end Canon shooters a stabilized telezoom that’s physically less burdensome than the 100–400mm and financially less so than the about-to-be-replaced 70–200mm f/2.8L IS. It’s also significantly superior by most optical standards. If you don’t need its rugged L-series build, though, stick with Canon’s current non-L 70–300mm f/4–5.6 IS, which is slightly sharper (at 300mm) and has slightly better close-up magnification (1:4.1 at 300mm).
March 29, 2011

 DBCossini's gear list:DBCossini's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
GKN
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow